Mary Lou McDonald (Dublin Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

First, it is really dishonest for the Minister to use the introduction of prescription fees and other cuts over which the Government has presided over as cover for introducing in this legilation multiple fees. Second, he knows, as we all do, that the reason the fees issue is controversial in the course of this debate at this committee is that it is accepted across the board that having a fee acts as a disincentive for people in seeking information. That is the position. Third, there are provisions within the legislation to deal with vexatious requests, which is correct and as it should be.

The multiple item requests cited by the Minister are a consequence of the introduction of fees. Naturally, where people are being charged unfairly, they will try to cover as many angles as they can in a single request. If the Minister wants to do away with this practice of throwing in the kitchen sink in a single FOI request, he should get rid of the fees.

I want to be in a position to support the restoration of freedom of information legislation.

I have made that clear to the Minister. The manner in which he has gone about all of this makes an absolute farce of his so-called reforms and a farce of the notion of pre-legislative phases at this committee. In fact, it makes a farce of the entire debate and hearings, the ritual we went through here. Not alone is he introducing an amendment that will affect not a single fee but multiple fees and upfront payments. He is doing it at the 11th hour in a way that I consider to be most unedifying for him as Minister, the Minister who proclaims to be committed to openness and transparency. There is nothing open or transparent about this. From my point of view, it is not sufficient at this juncture for the Minister to circulate the document to us or to tell us that his officials will give us a briefing. What we actually need is space, on the basis of his amendment. to hear from the National Union of Journalists, NUJ, the academics and the stakeholders their view of the consequences of this amendment and to allow us to consider it and even for the Minister to consider it. He might just be wrong.

If I am not mistaken, in 2003 when Fianna Fáil gutted the legislation, this Minister and his party were vociferous in opposing those charges because, at that stage, he understood the consequences of those charges. He was right then and he is wrong now.

Given the level of scepticism in the broad public around politics and political processes and openness and transparency, this is a very bad turn of events. Reinstating freedom of information should be a good moment for us yet, by his own actions at the 11th hour, in introducing a measure such as this he has, in fact, derailed what should have been a good news story. I reiterate my call that we halt proceedings at this stage, do things correctly, and give this committee its place. We are not here as extras to fill up the air time and then the Minister, Deputy Brendan Howlin, the Government or anybody else ploughs on and does whatever they want. That is unacceptable for any parliamentarian and it is unacceptable for this committee.

The reasonable thing for the Minister to do, given the implications of this amendment, is to hit the pause button, bring in the relevant stakeholders and allow them, with us, to tease out the implications of this amendment and then we can proceed. I would hope, having heard from those stakeholders, the Minister would revise his position and deliver legislation we could all support and stand over that was truly about freedom of information and not giving the veneer of information but actually holding things back and throwing up obstacles in people's way. Let us bear in mind that it is not only journalists who make FOI requests. Citizens make them too and NGOs and all manner of bodies.